1. The plaintiff filed an incidental appeal in the trial of the court below as follows.

1. Ex officio determination as to the legitimacy of the part concerning the extension of the plaintiff's claim for trial

A. Since an appeal is seeking change in favor of himself/herself in relation to a judgment unfavorable to him/her, the appeal is not permitted with respect to the entire judgment, and in principle, whether the judgment is disadvantageous to the appellant or not should be determined based on the text of the judgment.

However, where a lawsuit seeking performance of a claim for claim against a divisible claim is filed and the purport that the remaining part is reserved and only a claim is made, the res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment shall extend to the remaining part, and thus, it cannot be re-claimed by a separate lawsuit

Therefore, if an obligee who won the entire claim is not allowed to file an appeal to expand the remainder of the claim, the obligee who won the entire claim is disadvantaged by losing the opportunity to recover the remainder of the claim. In such a case, the benefit of appeal can be recognized to extend the remainder of the entire winning judgment.

(1) In the event of a partial claim, which clearly states that the remainder is reserved and only a part of the claim is claimed, the obligee who won the entire lawsuit may re-appeal the remainder by a separate lawsuit, barring any special circumstance. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the benefit of an appeal to expand the remainder of the claim is not recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Da37904, 37911, Jun. 15, 2007; 2008Da51649, Dec. 24, 2008; 2010Du14534, Nov. 11, 2010). This legal doctrine applies to the incidental appeal.

B. We examine the instant case in light of the aforementioned legal principles.

According to the records of this case, the plaintiff is a part of the first instance court.